Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealPartially AllowedCivil Application No. Nai. of 2017 (as extracted from Kisumu Civil Appeal No. 48 of 2017)· [2017] KECA 516 (KLR)

Khetia Drapers Ltd v Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers (Civil Application 43 of 2017) [2017] KECA 516 (KLR)

Court of Appeal
6 June 2017
1,032 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal paused a union dues order against Khetia Drapers, warning employers can't be forced into deductions that could trigger criminal liability.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a single-judge-panels-of-three application under rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules by Khetia Drapers Limited seeking stay of execution of an order of the Employment and Labour Relations Court made on 29th March 2017, and a stay of proceedings, pending an intended appeal (subsequently filed as Kisumu Civil Appeal No. 48 of 2017). The impugned order enjoined the employer to commence deduction of union dues from employees whose check-off forms appeared on the payroll with effect from April 2017. The dispute arose from a memorandum of claim filed by the Union in February 2017 seeking recognition and Shs. 3,986,400 as un-deducted dues. The order was made on 29th March 2017 when the Union's officer applied for an adjournment, unopposed by the employer. Reiterating the established rule 5(2)(b) test - arguability and nugatory-ness - the court found the appeal arguable because the order ex facie finally determined the dues issue at an interlocutory stage, leaving only recognition for trial, and raised grounds of jurisdiction, bias and breach of the right to be heard. The nugatory limb was satisfied because the employer faced potential criminal liability under section 48(6) of the Labour Relations Act if it deducted dues where membership was disputed and some check-off names alleged forged. The application was allowed: execution was stayed, proceedings in the trial court stayed for three months only, with costs in the appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Arguability of the intended appeal

Holding

The intended appeal was arguable; the impugned order ex facie summarily and finally determined part of the claim (deduction of union dues) at an interlocutory stage

Reasoning

The court examined the impugned order and found that the deduction of trade union dues had been finally determined at an interlocutory stage, leaving only the recognition claim for trial. Grounds including lack of jurisdiction, bias and condemnation without hearing were disclosed in the draft memorandum. The court declined to comment further on the merits since a substantive appeal was already filed.

p. 2
02

Whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory

Holding

The appeal would be rendered nugatory absent a stay, because the employer faced criminal liability under section 48(6) of the Labour Relations Act if it unlawfully deducted union dues where membership was disputed and some check-off names alleged to be forged

Reasoning

The trade union claimed Shs. 3,986,400 as un-deducted dues. The impugned order compelled deductions before the genuineness of membership was ascertained, and the employer alleged forgery of names on the check-off list. Given the risk of criminal liability under section 48(6) of the Labour Relations Act, the court was satisfied the nugatory limb was met.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • An applicant under rule 5(2)(b) must demonstrate that the intended appeal is arguable and that unless the order sought is granted the appeal would be rendered nugatory

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Stay of execution of the order of the Employment and Labour Relations Court made on 29th March 2017 in terms of prayer 2 of the application
  2. 2.Stay of proceedings in the trial court for three months only to facilitate the resolution of the appeal
  3. 3.Costs in the appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 5(2)(b)
  • Labour Relations ActSections 48 and 54
  • Labour Relations ActSection 48(6)
On appeal from
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Khetia Drapers Ltd v Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers (Civil Application 43 of 2017) [2017] KECA 516 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Civil Application No. Nai. of 2017 (as extracted from Kisumu Civil Appeal No. 48 of 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2017/516/eng@2017-06-06

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.